About your Search

20121002
20121010
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3 (some duplicates have been removed)
. doug we talked about a tweet from jack welch. did that ignite the controversy? >>reporter: the recovery surrounding friday's release of the unemployment numbers continues to swirl after jack welch, the respected former c.e.o. of g.e. treated "unbelievable jobs numbers. the chicago guys will do anything. can't debate? change numbers." facing criticism if the tweet he stuck by the criticism of the numbers. >> this number is made up of a whole mess of assumptions: who is participating, who is not working, who is trying for work, who has dropped out. it just begs the question. i think there ought to be a good discussion how this number is calculated. >>reporter: most analysts and the obama campaign are dismanage the criticisms as "without evidence." >> we wonder why institutions in this country are, the perception of institutions are failing, because people go on tv and make sufficient h stuff -- make stuff up. >> they had full charge of the first two years and the policies this president put into place actually made it worse, including the fact that obamacare is tale, if you ask employers,
the jobs number doesn't matter. is that in part this whole jack welch thing over the weekend around whether the numbers are real, does that matter in all of this? >> i think the jack welch stuff was crazy talk. and earlier in the year when you guys were down in washington on this, joe and i talked about it, there were between points that i would make. one, nobody messes or manipulates these numbers. but, took i think we exaggerate the importance of the numbers for this reason. the people who will vote on november the 6th know what they feel about the economy already. they're living it every day. so because there's a headline that says 7.8, it's a talking point, but they already know what their friends and neighbors are doing. >> when do we find out how romney is fun raising compared to that 180 million or whatever? >> i think if it was so par with obama's, we would have heard already. i think it's probably behind. >> you don't hear that that's unbecoming to have so much money to spend. just don't hear -- it's alway s the republicans. >> it's not decided by money. nice to have, but there is
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3 (some duplicates have been removed)